Originally Posted by Benladesh
I guess my physics professor (who is currently working on the LHC) was teaching us BS then...
The thing with this is that it really depends on who you're talking about, what is the situation relative to a certain person.
A person on a moving float bouncing a ball will see it bounce up and down, an observer beside the moving float will see it moving in "mmmm" motions.
The inertial frame of reference is basically how a certain thing can be observed relative to what you're doing (moving, being still .etc). What i said is an over simplification but it depends who the observer is.
The person in the ship will see time speed up on the outside, time goes normally for himself. The observer outside of the ship (lets assume at rest) will see time inside the ship slow down.
This is why it's called relativity, the situation changes depending on who the situation is relative too.
Either your professor's wrong, or your wrong, the two don't necessarily go hand in hand.
You were right up until you got to the point: "...The person in the ship will see time speed up on the outside..."
No he won't, he will see time slow down.
Let me flip this around, lets say that the guy on the ship is the proper observer for any arbitrary reason. He does not see himself in motion. He does not think he is moving. He sees that the world around him is in motion.
That said, lets say the guy on the ground is bouncing a ball as well (and really, this works so much better if your using a light clock for consistancy). The guy on the ground sees the ball going straight up, and straight down. The guy on the ship sees it following a VVVVV pattern since relative to him he is at rest and it is the guy on the ground who is moving.
Thus, the guy in the ship sees events outside of his ships going slower then events inside the ship.
You seem to think that there is a reason to prefer one inertial frame of reference to another. That is wrong.
Your closing statement is hypocritical, you say things will change depending on who's frame of reference were considering the proper frame of reference. Yet your example states the opposite.Edited by Singular1ty - 4/13/11 at 1:27pm